Smaller orgs VP level. Larger EVP. You almost always retain a lawyer to review these things. Change in control is a very common trigger for a lot of things in most employment contracts of this nature. The downside is you end up with much more ironclad covenants and restrictions. But your comp is often at a FU level if you do get fired so it balances most of the time.

I'd recommend reading "Barbarians at the gate". It will give you a very good idea.

When it comes to levels, those kind of golden parachutes are offered only at top levels. VPs, SVPs, etc. are help and get normal packages when they leave, at least in normal, large blue chip companies.

It's simple.

You say "this company turns over 20 billion a year revenue. If I want to I can flush the whole damn lot down the toilet."

"Pay me to not do a shit job."

Latest in executive compensation research. As advocated by expensive consultancies.

I think some CEOs actually do that. For example the CEO of Boeing certainly decided to flush the thing down the toilet.

Hindsight is always 20/20

You might enjoy reading the book "Pay without Performance: The Unfulfilled Promise of Executive Compensation" [1]

TLDR: Companies don't engage in arms-length negotiation with CEOs. Shareholders don't hold companies to account for various structural reasons.

[1] http://www.pay-without-performance.com/

I've only seen it at the CSuite (and occasionally key SVP levels).... almost always if you're brought in from the outside.